Ginger GMChess Grandmaster Simon Williamshttps://www.gingergm.comRadio interviewshttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/radio-interviewshttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/radio-interviewshttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/radio-interviewsMon, 03 Dec 2018 12:12:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>Listen to a couple of radio interviews I did on the recently completed Carlsen - Caruana World Championship match.</p>
<h4>BBC Radio Scotland</h4><h4>Love Sport Radio</h4>]]>The British Rapidplay (The Shining) and Thoughts on Carlsen vs Caruanahttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/the-british-rapidplay-the-shining-and-thoughts-on-carlsen-vs-caruanahttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/the-british-rapidplay-the-shining-and-thoughts-on-carlsen-vs-caruanahttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/the-british-rapidplay-the-shining-and-thoughts-on-carlsen-vs-caruanaTue, 27 Nov 2018 12:11:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>The British Rapidplay seems to be one of those events that are stalwarts of the British weekend chess calendar, particularly later in the year. You have the Edinburgh congress, Southend, Blackpool, Paignton, Scarborough and probably other events that I’ve failed to mention, that mentally you “pencil” in as tournaments you’d like to play in and try to win.</p><p>In the last few years I haven’t been playing that many of these sort of tournaments, and so this year I’ve been trying to make up for it. For me there’s nothing more frustrating than watching a tournament from the sidelines and knowing you could have won it, yet being powerless to do anything, because you blew the money you put away for that event on the 3.10 at Chepstow.</p>
<p>So I decided to travel to Ilkley, near Leeds, to play in the British Rapid Championships. It took place in the Craiglands Hotel, which was a pleasant, if slightly old-fashioned setting. The Open venue gave a view of the hotel grounds, and the whole thing brought to mind that hotel in The Shining, although probably every hotel I stay in reminds me of that hotel in The Shining. The chess was seemingly just as painful and bloody. In round two I blew a surely winning ending against Peter Shaw. I bounced back though very quickly when beating a strong junior player in round three.</p><h3>Long Variations are Always Wrong!</h3>
<p>The game that caused me most pain on the Saturday was against Sarakaukas. It ended in a draw, and after the game I went to a restuarant and started to play through variations in my head. The place was called the Moody Cow, to retain the bovine theme, as the tournament itself was played on Cowpasture Road. In the cafe itself to watch over my ruminations and make me feel guilty about my ribeye steak, a large picture of a cow loomed in my vision.</p><h3>Is Weekend Chess Dying?</h3>
<p>One thing I found disappointing about the tournament was that they reduced the prize fund after a few rounds. First prize was reduced from GBP 400 to GBP 375, second prize from GBP 250 to GBP 175, third prize was reduced as well and they got rid of the fourth prize altogether. Although the turn-out wasn’t great in the Open section it seems a reflection of the way it’s going now in weekend chess in this country, which seems to be slowly dying. Now the prizes are so low it’s difficult to justify even turning up. If I win GBP 375, well then with my over GBP 200 expenses, I’m barely making a profit. To make matters worse I didn’t even win the first prize anyway.</p>
<p>When I played the British Rapidplay about 15 years ago, the first prize was about GBP 700. So we can see that the prize fund has gone down considerably, and everything else has become more expensive. This is standard for most British weekenders. The Blackpool first prize has gone down, and the Edinburgh one is the same as it was twenty years ago. Paignton has gone down, as well. Obviously these tournaments don’t just exist to prop up professional players, but it is a shame as I cut my teeth in these events, and now it gets to the point where it becomes pointless even playing them. And if they become weaker year on year it’s a poor reflection on British chess.</p>
<p>One player who seems to still play a lot of these tournaments is Richard Bates. I faced him in round four in an interesting game.</p><h3>Vertigo</h3>
<p>On the morning of the Sunday (bear in mind that the British Rapidplay is played over 11 games and two rounds) I had a bad vertigo attack. Essentially the crystals in the inner ear become disturbed, and when I woke up in my bed and breakfast, it felt like I was on board a cruise ship in the middle of the Atlantic during a storm. I literally couldn’t get out of bed and felt so sick that I was very close to ringing up the organisers and withdrawing.</p>
<p>In the end I dragged myself in, to face not a great pairing at 9.30 in the morning however healthy you are feeling, against the wunderkind Yichen Han, who represents Netherlands but lives in the North East. This kid is only 11 but is already getting incredible results. I’d estimate his strength at around 2300 already. He made the right choice, went for the Najdorf and we reached the following position:</p><h3>Kicking the Wall, After Being Kicked by the Wall</h3>
<p>I’ve never been the best loser. And that tendency to get angry, if results don’t go my way. Even in the round two game, where I drew with Peter Shaw, the signs were there that I was close to losing control. I started swearing at the board. When I played Tim Wall in round ten, it seemed as if I had recovered - I was cruising along with 7.5/9.</p>
<p>Perhaps it was the pressure put on me by my co-leaders, Bates and Sarakauskus - I couldn’t shake them off. I also felt tired. I had three tough games already that day, and perhaps playing these marathon events is too tough for me now I’ve turned 40. Whatever the reasons, it all came crashing down against Tim Wall.</p><h3>Calculation Kills</h3>
<p>In the last round I was able to bounce back and win and salvage joint second place from a disappointment of a tournament. I would stop short of saying a disaster - I felt a lot of the players there were underrated and I still scored plus six. Against Tate it seemed like he missed a good opportunity. In a position where he should have gone for a concrete line, he played a safe move instead. Sometimes you have to seize the moment!</p><h3>Thoughts on Carlsen - Caruana</h3>
<p>My thoughts on the Carlsen - Caruana match are that this is surely the last time that we will see the 12 game format that the World Chess Championship final currently enjoys. As things stand the eventual winner is still unclear because as everyone will aware when they read these words, the 12 games in classical time controls were all drawn.</p>
<p>In a shared taxi to the 4NCL in Daventry, Hungarian grandmaster Tamas Fodor predicted that all 12 games of the classical section would be drawn. I thought he was joking at time - now he looks like a soothsayer. Clearly the players are very well matched, and very well prepared. And they play very accurately, they are both very young, so the chess is of a very high quality. Grischuk said in his commentary that in terms of least number of mistakes, it’s probably the highest quality match in chess history. So some draws can be expected.</p>
<p>I think the “perfect storm” of 12 draws, which is surely a horrendous advertisement for chess can only be explained by the fact that neither player felt the need to take huge risks. They only have 12 games - no time to recover from a loss. Just change the format to a longer one. 20 games should take care of this problem. Matthew Sadler did a very interesting analysis of the match using the Alpha Zero programme, that I watched last night on Youtube. One of the games from the match reached the following position. Here Alpha Zero suggested a very dangerous looking plan for Black:</p><p>One glimpse at the position can clearly show that Black has a very dangerous looking initiative. Perhaps if Magnus had found this idea, he would have won in normal time? Unfortunately we now have a situation where Caruana could become World Champion without not having won a game in classical time controls, during that match. In fact he can even become World Champion without winning a game in the play-offs, if he is so inclined to draw every game and then survive the armageddon game (assuming he gets Black in that game.)</p>
<p>If such a damning fact does not convince the people in charge to make serious changes to the format, then nothing will. I also feel that Carlsen has been disappointing in this match. He looks too nervous, and like in the Karjakin match he looks rather too desperate to win without showing anything really impressive over the board. If he were to lose the match now it has entered the play-offs I’m not sure it would be undeserved, because over the two matches, Carlsen-Karjakin and Carlsen-Caruana, could you really say he deserves to win both?</p>]]>Who Will Dethrone Carlsen?https://www.gingergm.com/blog/who-will-dethrone-carlsenhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/who-will-dethrone-carlsenhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/who-will-dethrone-carlsenTue, 06 Nov 2018 12:11:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>With the upcoming World Championship match due to take place in London very soon, I thought it was a good time to discuss who, if anyone, is likely to dethrone Magnus Carlsen over the next few years.</p><p>Clearly as he has first shot then the most likely candidate is Fabiano Caruana. If I had to describe Caruana’s style, then I would describe it as “relentless.” He has this ability to just keep going - to keep chipping away at the other guy, with relentless accuracy, engine-like chess that will inevitably induce a nervous collapse from the opponent sooner rather than later.</p>
<p>Leaving all the cliches behind for a moment (a difficult thing for a writer of my ilk to do, it must be said), what do I truly think of Caruana? What do YOU think of Caruana?</p>
<p>To be completely honest, there is nothing particularly memorable or interesting about Caruana’s chess. Not when you compare him to some of the great players from the past. Maybe I’m being harsh, but I feel that in fifty years time Carlsen’s games will be remembered, but Caruana’s won’t. Or maybe neither will be remembered. All swept away in the tide of cybernetic clones that appear in the meantime.</p>
<p>Perhaps I’m just a Carlsen fanboy, but if you think of his best games they seem quite memorable, even if a little bit boring - the long endgame grinds where he managed to win from seemingly unwinnable positions. Carlsen has that distinctive quality, which I feel that Caruana lacks.</p>
<p>Again, all this seems quite harsh, and again when you think of Caruana’s games, you think of this relentless accuracy, which reflects his work with the computer. Clearly he calculates very well, is extremely well prepared and is willing to take risks. He’s a bit of an all-rounder who can do everything well, which seems to be the fashion these days.</p>
<p>Gone are the lop-sided players of the past, who adhered to the “Big Claw” theory. The following game emphasises the influence of the computer. Caruana is willing to open up his king, not in any sense worried about any weaknesses that might have developed in his King’s position.</p><h3>The Iranian Matthew Sadler.</h3>
<p>The chess world is a dynamic, ever changing place. New talents appear all the time. One player I hadn’t even heard of till about ten days ago was Parham Maghsoodloo, from Iran.</p>
<p>Parham is 18 and he won the World Junior Championships with a round to spare. There seemed something almost inevitable about his victory as soon as a youtube video emerged where Parham, when interviewed at an earlier tournament, claimed to be working up to twenty hours a day and at worst only ten hours a day (slacking?).</p>
<p>While I’m often sceptical about such pronoucements (where would you find the time to sleep?) and believe that sometimes such claims are made to intimidate the opposition, this one seemed to have the ring of truth. There’s no doubt looking at Parham’s games, given the depth of opening preparation, and his ability to find his way through the complications, that he’s working extremely hard on chess on a regular basis. It’s very hard to do these things purely on natural talent.</p>
<p>Chess has a history of rewarding the obsessional. Think back to the times of Bobby Fischer, who even with all his talent, at the end of his short-lived career simply outworked the opposition into submission. Perhaps that’s why his career was so short-lived; he may have suffered from burn-out. And whether working on chess for ten hours a day is in anyway more productive than working on chess for four hours a day, I don’t really know. What it will do is help your stamina. If you are prepared to sit at home for long periods studying chess then long gruelling games in tournaments are unlikely to hold any fear. That’s a big advantage over your opponent already. And I think that’s an advantage that Fischer used as well.</p>
<p>Personally speaking, if I spent at least ten hours a day studying chess, I’d be quite likely to go insane (some might argue I already am) and it’s also unlikely to help with developing any social skills. But if the ambition is there to reach the very top, then that kind of ability to work obsessionally hard is likely to give you an edge. From what I hear through the grapevine, even most of the top guys players don’t work that hard. They probably did at some point, then got on the Sinquefield Cup/Grand Chess Tour gravy train, and the hunger waned.</p><h3>Maxed out?</h3>
<p>When discussing some of these top players with a friend of mine, he would often refer to such and such a player as being “maxed out”. In other words he’s already worked so hard on chess during the course of his career that no more improvement is likely to be forthcoming.</p>
<p>I’m not completely convinced by that argument, although there are some slightly cautionary tales through chess history that backs up this “maxed out” argument. The English player who I would most compare to Parham is Matthew Sadler, as Sadler was known for being an extremely hard worker. He too, would spend at least ten hours a day studying chess when he was a full-time professional player.</p>
<p>Of course Sadler reached a very high level - somewhere around the 2680 mark, and yet when he was exposed to the super-elite - the Kramniks, the Anands - I think he realized that this was a level that he would struggle to ever reach. He could compete with them but they would always have some kind of edge. You can only get so far on hard work alone. So he got a full-time job, and now when he plays part time, he plays as well as anyone around.</p>
<p>A similiar story is Gata Kamsky, although he got much closer than Sadler to the greatest goal - the World Championship title, eventually losing to Anand in the final of the PCA World Championship, and also to Karpov in the final of the FIDE version. Kamsky would work up to 12 hours a day, driven on by his father in pursuit of the title, and yet when he tried to summit the very top of the pyramid he came very close - yet ultimately came up short.</p>
<p>So when people on social media make extravagant comments about Parham being World Champion within three years you have to acknowledge the truth - that Carlsen at the same age was already rated 2800, and the next step-up is much harder.</p>
<p>In the next game Parham looks under severe pressure, but uncorks a startling combination, no doubt planned in advance.</p><h3>The Mysterious Child from the East.</h3>
<p>Now we move on to a different type of player altogether - Rameshbabu Praggnanandha, a 13 year old prodigy from India. “Pragga” as he is already known (presumably to save energy for the commentators) belongs in that category of players who come along only every so often - the Super-Talents.</p>
<p>Indeed such has been this young players progress over the last few years that his elevation to the top of the game seems almost pre-ordained, and in fact it would be surprising if over the next few years Rameshbabu didn’t find his way to the top super grandmaster tournaments. The only question is when.</p>
<p>I’ve often wondered, given the history of prodigies within chess and how there seems to be nothing stopping a young player attaining supreme mastery of the game, whether or not we could have a teenage world champion. Would it be possible to have a 15 year old world champion, for example?</p>
<p>Indeed, it seems that in the internet age it’s much easier than ever before for brilliant prodigies to breakthrough. Would you be surprised to see Pragga competing against Carlsen and Caruana at the age of 15, 16 on equal terms? I wouldn’t. And the mystery has been stripped away for the public about such players - gone are the days when we’d have to wait every three years for a Leonard Barden column in the Evening Standard, proclaiming the latest mysterious prodigy from the east.</p>
<p>Pragga already has quite a large collection of his blitz games, played in various events around the world, available to watch on YouTube. It’s quite clear from watching these games that he has a stable, positional style, not unlike a player that he is often compared to in Viswanathan Anand. And like Anand he also has the ability to change gears - a subtle tactical eye will pick out any weaknesses in the opponents position.</p><h3>The X-Factor</h3>
<p>These super-talents show their hand early on, in the sense they display an x-factor in their games that very few players possess; in other words that ability to show a brilliance that is not common. This is one of the reason that I’m not convinced that Caruana is the World Champion in waiting - his games just don’t seem to have that indefinable quality. Kasparov had it, Carlsen has it, and now it would seem that Pragga has it, if his combination against Wesley So in a recent match, is anything to go by:</p><h3>Do Juniors have the Fear Factor as well?</h3>
<p>One of the things I noticed from watching Pragga’s games on YouTube is how terrified some of his opponents seemed to be. In theory it should be the other way around, the younger player should be intimidated by taking on those who are older and more experienced, but instead the social embarrassment of losing to someone who just looks like a young child seems to override this logic.</p>
<p>I used to have a very bad record against junior players and have managed to improve it in more recent times. I guess you just have to tell yourself that fearless prodigy sat opposite you, will one day be just like you - a washed-up chess pro with a beer gut. Juniors are beatable and fallible - even if sometimes it doesn’t seem like they are - you have to put yourself in a position to take advantage of their lack of experience. In the next game Pragga plays extremely precisely through one phase of the game, only to experience a meltdown as the game reaches it’s crescendo.</p>]]>Coulsdon, British Blitz and Beyondhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/coulsdon-british-blitz-and-beyondhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/coulsdon-british-blitz-and-beyondhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/coulsdon-british-blitz-and-beyondTue, 18 Sep 2018 12:09:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>Regular readers of these blogs have long since been bored with death (along with many other subjects that I’ve spoken about) with my talk about how “If only I could play more, my results would be much better.” Well, to some extent my argument has been borne out by my recent improved results. Starting with the last three rounds of the British Championships, when I finally felt I had begun to get into a better rhythm, I followed that up with winning two tournaments: the Jessie Gilbert Memorial at Coulsdon, and then the British Blitz qualifier at Newcastle.</p><p>Confidence I might define as the state where it becomes easier to make the correct decision than the wrong one. Certainly when you feel confident you realize you have more options, and in my view it’s difficult to get to that state unless you are fully match fit. Have a look at Tiger Woods this season as an example. On the PGA tour when he first came back, Tiger was pretty awful. But tournament on tournament he became stronger, to the extent that he came very close to winning one of the last two majors.</p>
<p>Another one of the advantages of playing a lot is that you can often use some of your analysis that you weren’t able to use in your previous tournaments almost straight away. Such was the case when I faced Conor Murphy at Coulsdon.</p><h3>Will anyone ever replace Adams?</h3>
<p>John Saunders made an interesting point in the latest copy of chess magazine that in some ways (although certainly not from Mickey’s perspective) it’s perhaps somewhat disappointing that Michael Adams is still the dominant figure in British chess and that no-one has been able to “knock him off his pedestal” as Fergie would put it, with more colourful language added.</p>
<p>It’s certainly true that while the likes of Howell, Jones and McShane have edged closer in recent years and can certainly be expected to supplant him over the next ten, they haven’t quite achieved the level of international success that he was able to. It’s hard to hit the very top, and it’s not getting easier - the standard in the World Junior Championships which is taking place at the moment is utterly ridiculous - there are so many good young players now. The top seed is a guy from Iran, who apparently does about 20 hours on chess a day, which easily eclipses my 20 minutes a month.</p>
<p>Unless you are prepared to work extremely hard, or are uniquely talented (a la Carlsen), you are probably not going to reach the very summit of the game. Which is one of the reasons why we now produce good, but not great juniors. 16 year old Borna Derakhshani came closest to achieving an IM norm in Coulsdon. One of his victims was the unfortunate Chernaiev, who fell foul of some deadly tactical ideas.</p><h3>Stuck in time</h3>
<p>When I arrived in Coulsdon it was like the last fifteen or twenty years had never happened. I first went down to that area in the late 1990s. Myself, John Naylor and a few others started to play for the team that the head of the Coulsdon Chess Fellowship, Howard Curtis, had put together. Howard was subsequently disgraced for events connected to the church, a sad episode. But most of Coulsdon hasn’t changed much. Sure, the cozy old pub, the Red Lion, that we used to hang out after matches has gone, as has so many similiar social hide-outs in England now.</p>
<p>The majority of Coulsdon though,seems stuck almost in time, perhaps because a large proportion of the population commute into London - it being part of the Surrey stockbroker belt, and don’t feel particularly inclined to reinvest in the local economy. Although commuting to London every day would completely exhaust me, playing chess is surprisingly tiring as well. And the problem with Coulsdon is that we had to play two games a day, which at my age is really too much.</p>
<p>It was only at the very end of the event that it hit me how tired I was. When I played Ali Hill in round six, I still felt fresh but one my weaknesses came to the fore, the inability to demonstrate patience. I went on the attack too early in the game, when White had done nothing wrong, and in some ways I was lucky to escape to an equal ending. And then things went wrong again, and when we reached the diagram position Black was very much in trouble.</p><h3>Cherniaev</h3>
<p>Alexander Cherniaev is an interesting character. He comes across as being quite passionate about chess - sometimes too passionate, and like the guy who he used to work for, Anatoly Karpov, he loves to analyse. Sometimes this intensity can be a bit too much, like immediately before the game you don’t always want to be discussing intently a game that occurred several rounds ago - you want to be thinking about the matter in hand.</p>
<p>Still I like the guy - you need these passionate people in life, people who think deeply about chess, especially in this day and age when the obsession is what does the engine think about the position. If I had the money I’d hire him as a trainer because his knowledge of chess openings is very impressive. Although his result in Coulsdon was really dismal, and because of this he’s one of an ever-growing army of ageing chess pros to dip below 2400 (no doubt I’ll soon be joining the list).</p>
<p>He failed to win a game, and I think this was partly due to two factors, one of which was the fact he had to commute. I find it slightly sad in this day and age that the organisers could not find it possible to put up a Grandmaster in an IM norm event, so Alex had to commute from London. In fairness to Scott Freeman who was the main organiser, and who was kind enough to put me up in his house, he admitted he was running the event at a loss. The other factor in Alex’s bad result was no doubt the fact that he had to face so many underrated juniors. One of these was Conor Murphy, who bounced back immediately after his loss.</p><h3>The wedding of the year</h3>
<p>In the last round I took a quick draw against Gavin Wall and left for a lengthy journey to the Isle of Wight, where I was attending the wedding of Gary O’Grady to Marina, a Russian girl he met through work. It was rather surprising when I got to Southampton and got on the ferry to the Isle of Wight how short the journey was - only 15 minutes. Even better, the hotel was right next to the ferry terminal in West Cowes. Some of the other Grandmasters attending the wedding weren’t so lucky. Keith Arkell and Mark Hebden managed to take the slow ferry to East Cowes, because they assumed that was the only ferry terminal in the Isle of Wight. The only reason I managed to take the right boat was because when I was in email correspondence with Gary, he said take the fast boat. Mentally I patted myself on the back for making the right decision, as normally it’s the other way around.</p><p>The wedding itself took part in the serene surroundings of Osborne House, which famously is the old residence of Queen Victoria in her later years. That can’t have come cheap at all to hire as a wedding venue, I thought. Gary in general is a very nice bloke, not just because he splashes out money on chess players which he doesn’t have to do, he’s just a nice guy in general. In chess you need these benefactors really, people who are aware that the money in chess is rubbish, and that us poor grandmasters need some help. Of course after the wedding everyone got completely smashed, and the usual sentimental platitudes came out.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most amusing incident of the whole weekend was when Simon Williams and Blair Connell got stuck in a local pub, and hitched a ride with two jet skiers - not your conventional way of getting to the reception, I’m sure you’d agree.</p>
<p>The next tournament I took part in was the British Blitz championship qualifer, which took part in Newcastle. There were eight qualifiers which took part in different locations up and down the country, and obviously by far the nearest one for me to get to was Newcastle. I was top seed and the two biggest rivals on paper were David Eggleston and James Adair, and it didn’t take me long to be paired with one of them.</p>]]>Mastering Queen Play in the Middlegamehttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/mastering-queen-play-in-the-middlegamehttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/mastering-queen-play-in-the-middlegamehttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/mastering-queen-play-in-the-middlegameFri, 06 Jul 2018 12:07:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>How we use our queen is often taken for granted because it’s such a powerful piece. In this article I want to look at games where the queen played a crucial role.</p>
<p>The following game is a real classic.</p><p>White’s defence seems to be overloaded almost to breaking point so the question is how to break through? The attacking genius Leonid Stein found a very elegant solution:</p><p>Now you know the theme, finding the right idea in the following position should be a matter of course:</p><p>An extremely beautiful final touch, but really the queen did all the “heavy work”.</p>
<p>Successful use of the queen in the middlegame is often about using your imagination, and also asking yourself “How can my queen be best deployed?” There comes a point in the game where you need to decide what to do with the queen. It’s often best in the centre, but of course that option isn’t always available to us. Never mind, because the queen can be a powerful attacking force from the side as well&#8230;</p><h3>Queen in the Centre</h3>
<p>Where the queen really comes into it’s own is the centre of the board of course, where it can command it’s power over the entire landscape. I’ve played a lot of blitz chess with Charlie Storey over the years, and one of the things he said he picked up from our sessions was how often I placed my queen in the middle of the board when I got the chance; before he had underestimated what an important factor this was.</p>]]>Middlegame Masterclasshttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/middlegame-masterclasshttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/middlegame-masterclasshttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/middlegame-masterclassThu, 28 Jun 2018 12:06:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>In this series, which will hopefully form the backbone of a future video series, I’m going to focusing on middlegame ideas and concepts which turn up on a regular basis.</p>
<p><em>Editor’s note: Danny’s new video series has been recorded and will be available soon exclusively for Ginger GM.</em></p>
<p>And not just strategical concepts either, but also more psychological ones, like what to do in certain situations when you’re under pressure, for example. In this first part we’re going to be focusing on mastery of knight play in the middlegame.</p><h3>Knights in the Center Part 1 - Fragile Knights</h3>
<p>In my last article we looked at my game against Stephen Gordon, where in the early middlegame I seemed to lose my way quite quickly. So let’s return to the critical position.</p><p>Careful use of the knights can gain the initiative. One player who perhaps understands dynamic play as well or better than any chess player in history is Vishy Anand. Perhaps then it’s unsurprising that in an early game Anand demonstrated his mastery of the use of knights in the center:</p><h3>Knight Exploiting Weak Squares</h3>
<p>Knights can be very powerful attacking pieces due to their ability to exploit weak squares in the opponent’s territory. A classic example is the following Kasparov game:</p><p>In the next game, played at the recent 4NCL, Black also exploited this theme of a knight reaching the powerful square of d3 to win in comfortable fashion.</p><h3>Knights Exploiting Unguarded Squares</h3>
<p>The ability of knights to dictate the play is often related to time - for example if a player lacks the time to defend weak squares, or mobilise his own knights, which is exactly what happened in the next game.</p>]]>Solutions to Danny’s Puzzles #1https://www.gingergm.com/blog/solutions-to-dannys-puzzles-1https://www.gingergm.com/blog/solutions-to-dannys-puzzles-1https://www.gingergm.com/blog/solutions-to-dannys-puzzles-1Thu, 31 May 2018 12:05:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>[The first part of this article can be found at <a href="https://www.gingergm.com/blog/dannys-puzzles-1">Danny’s Puzzles #1</a>]</p>
<p>I was impressed by the response that I got to my <a href="https://www.gingergm.com/blog/dannys-puzzles-1">problem solving article</a>. Unlike most of the articles I tirelessly put up on gingergm.com, I actually got some responses!</p>
<p>Unfortunately there were one or two problems. Firstly it was impossible to tell if people were using an engine or not, so the answers had to be taken on trust. Clearly the other problem is the higher rated players will come up with the best answers. As I stated in the original article, the prize won’t always be awarded to the player who comes up with the technically best answers.</p>
<p>In the first game, I asked what was White’s best continuation here.</p><p>A nice game to analyse as the lines are forcing. Basically the crucial idea is <strong>Rxb7!</strong> Key point to remember - <em>when attacking, look out for sacrificial ideas that might bust an obdurate defence</em>. Winning a chess game ultimately isn’t about how many pieces you have at the end of the game, but about checkmating the opponent’s king.</p>
<p>In this next example, I wanted you to analyse three possible candidate moves and decide which one was best. The three choices were <strong>1&#8230;Bg4</strong>, <strong>1&#8230;Qa5</strong> and <strong>1&#8230;g5</strong>.</p><p>This game could really be labelled under the heading <em>“Don’t try this at home folks.”</em> Although Caruana won this game due to the aggressive <strong>&#8230;g5</strong>, we are talking about a player with a very high understanding of dynamic play who can clearly understand when to make such moves and when such play might be too risky.</p>
<p>What I don’t want is for readers to start throwing their pawns up in front of their king, but more to understand that pre-conceptions regarding such play as always being too risky are clearly wrong. Judge each situation on it’s merits.</p>
<p>That’s why I found the comment by Edward Welsch in regards to this problem as being quite revealing. He rejected <strong>&#8230;g5</strong> giving the reason <em>“g5 unnecessarily weakens our king’s position.”</em> That’s right. Don’t weaken the kings position if it’s unnecessary.</p>
<p>However, here some rudimentary calculation can demonstrate that a few moves later White is under serious pressure, so there are many situations where throwing the pawns forward is justified. What we can learn from this example is to focus on our calculation. If our calculation is good, then we won’t keep getting confused worrying about general principles.</p>
<p>The next game was very similar to the Caruana game.</p><p>Shankland went on to outplay his opponent and score a crucial win. I find it very interesting that two very modern players, in Shankland and Caruana, were not afraid to weaken their king if it meant recieving an immediate gain in dynamic chances. Clearly this is a lesson for all of us, that the idea that playing weakening pawn moves in front of your king is always bad, is simply a faulty concept.</p>
<p>This is the final example. White has just played <strong>Qc6!</strong> A good final try, and the question was what is the best way of meeting that move?</p><p>It was very hard to evaluate but I’m actually going to give the prize to <strong>Edward Welsch</strong>, although it could easily have gone to Mr JS-1000 or Jens Nissen. I did suspect though that Nissen had an advantage over the other players in terms of rating, that might not be correct but as I said before it’s not always about giving the most accurate answers.</p>
<p>Congrats Edward, please contact us at sales@gingergm.com to arrange your prize! And thank you to everyone that had a go.</p>
<p>Hopefully I can run a similar competition in the future. A good prize to win could be an hours masterclass with the Ginger GM himself - perhaps on Harry the h-pawn play? Or maybe a signed picture from Charlie the Chess Cat.</p>
<p>I do think this way of going through the positions, explaining why such and such a move might be good and some other move might be bad, is quite useful. I also feel I’ve learnt a lot about some of these positions as well, because I’ve had to think about them more carefully than I might have done otherwise.</p>]]>Final 4NCL Weekend 2017-18https://www.gingergm.com/blog/final-4ncl-weekend-2017-18https://www.gingergm.com/blog/final-4ncl-weekend-2017-18https://www.gingergm.com/blog/final-4ncl-weekend-2017-18Fri, 11 May 2018 12:05:00 GMT<![CDATA[<h3>Why I’m Quitting Team Chess</h3>
<p>It’s become an almost running joke inside my 4NCL team, Blackthorne Russia. Why this is the last weekend, why I’m fed up with these atrociously long train journeys and getting battered and losing rating points everytime I play.</p>
<p>A lot of the problem I have with 4NCL is that there is often a gap between the previous weekend of a month or so. In some other countries, they play the whole league format at the same time, which I believe is a fairer format. It was extremely noticeable in the final weekend, which was played in the glamorous location of a hotel in Telford, how out of shape I was chesswise. I don’t train at home really, so the only way I can get “into shape” is to play tournaments. So everytime I’ve turned up at the 4NCL the last few years, I’ve struggled. And I’m fed up with it.</p><p>Fed up with losing rating points in the same competition year after year, so this time I’m going to be true to my word for once and quit playing in the 4NCL altogether. To be honest I don’t really believe in team chess. Chess is an individual game, and it’s not like football for example, where your play directly influences other members of the team. Chessplayers in general are extremely selfish individuals, I’m no different, and in truth if I had a choice between winning my game and the team losing, or losing and the team winning, I’d choose the former everytime (no wonder I took the minus offer on the chase.)</p>
<p>In truth though, maybe I’m deluding myself. It’s entirely possible that my poor form in the 4NCL is just a symptom of my crap play over the last few years. I need to get my backside in gear and start training again, because I feel woefully underprepared for any problems that might arise over the board. A key example of this is the game against Stephen Gordon in the final round.</p>
<p>On his previous move he played Nxd4, so his knights are quite mobile in the center and I have to be careful. What should Black play here? I don’t think I came up with a very good solution.</p><h3>Controversy at the 4NCL</h3>
<p>In truth, even if I was in good shape, playing black against Steve Gordon would be a tough game. Just the point I’m making is that to compete with these guys I need to be on absolute top form, and it’s clear when I play 4NCL it’s just Gorm operating on 30% capacity. I’ve bored people to death over the last few years by telling them that I need to get an extended run of chess together if I’m to make any progress. That this stop-start approach doesn’t work for me at all. It needs to happen soon though as I’ve just turned 42 and the brain cells are disappearing by the minute. As for Steve, anyone who has spoken to him for any extended period of time can testify that he’s one of the nicest people in chess which is why his behaviour against Jack Rudd was so out of character. I didn’t see the incident myself, but apparently it happened just after the time control.</p><h3>The Importance of Technique</h3>
<p>The game I really should have won was against Craig Hanley. It really was an illustration of why good technique is so important. When you see these games of Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana, they make finishing off the game so easy, and for me it creates a false impression of how easy it is to win won games. Not that the game against Hanley was winning by force, but it seemed to me that we got the kind of position that Magnus would win 99/100, if not 100/100.</p>
<p>In the diagram position I’ve sacced the exchange to create these very dangerous pawns on e5 and f5, and Black feels obliged to sacrifice the exchange back immediately to take the sting out of my initiative:</p><h3>Is Sadler now one of the Strongest Players in the World?</h3>
<p>I don’t know if anyone has been paying attention, but Matthew Sadler, a supposed part-time player, has been doing very well of late and winning almost every game in the 4NCL and in any other local competition he chooses to enter.</p>
<p>I’m sure the work ethic that Sadler retains puts supposed full-time players like me to shame, and yet I wonder if this is a missed opportunity. Why isn’t Sadler taking advantage of this form and trying to qualify for competitions like the World Cup? Because it seems to me on current form Sadler is easily 2720 or 2730 strength, which would put him amongst some of the strongest players in the world. Already his live rating is running very close to 2700.</p>
<p>Speaking with one of his final-weekend “victims”, Neil McDonald, Neil told me that Sadler essayed a risky move in the opening that he had played before. Neil felt he wouldn’t repeat it because apparently strong players “don’t repeat what they played before”. This seems like strange logic to me, because one of the recurring themes when playing through the games of very strong players is their stubborness and desire to stick with what they know.</p><p>Guildford were able to retain their title with the help of Sadler and co. As I said to Neil on the train journey back, the league has become boring unless you are a Guildford fan, because they win it easily every year. My advice to make the competition more interesting is to impose some kind of rating average; this would mean though that probably fewer 2600 players would compete in the 4ncl. Not that I care anyway as I’m out of it now. No more 4NCL for me! Well at least not until next season&#8230;</p>]]>Danny’s Puzzles #1https://www.gingergm.com/blog/dannys-puzzles-1https://www.gingergm.com/blog/dannys-puzzles-1https://www.gingergm.com/blog/dannys-puzzles-1Thu, 03 May 2018 12:05:00 GMT<![CDATA[<p>[2018-05-31: Solutions can be found at <a href="https://www.gingergm.com/blog/solutions-to-dannys-puzzles-1">Solutions to Danny’s Puzzles #1</a>]</p>
<p>Rather than the usual boring articles where I rant on about every subject on the sun, I thought I’d change tack completely and try to produce something that is more interactive for the reader.</p>
<p>So the purpose of these articles is to give some scenarios that have might have occurred over the board, and ask the reader to come up with the solution to the problem. If you can give the answers in the comment section down below, then the best answer each week will win a free DVD from the Ginger GM shop.</p><p>You can’t say fairer than that, can you? The only condition is that the answers aren’t too computer generated. I will be checking each position with an engine, so if it looks as if you’ve just reeled off a lot of computer analysis, then you won’t be winning the prize. Basically very human answers are very welcome!</p>
<p>We are looking to cater for all levels on this website, so I don’t mind mistakes, as long as you are trying! The more answers the merrier as well, and if you’re the only one who’s bothered to reply in the comments section, then expect a DVD in the post!</p>
<h3>1.1: Nakamura - Akobian, US Championships 2018</h3>
<p>To start off with I’m giving a position from the game Nakamura-Akobian, from the recent US championships. In that game “Naka” made an early pawn sacrifice with the thrust e5-e6! Akobian took back with the pawn, but he could easily have taken back with the queen, in which case they may have reached the position below.</p>
<p>The question is: find a good continuation for White in this position.</p><h3>Gorm’s Weekly Rant</h3>
<p>Ok, before we get on to talking about the next game, I want to get my weekly rant off my chest (you didn’t think you were going to get off that easily, did you?)</p>
<p>I’m thinking about the Shamkir tournament and what occurred in the last round. Magnus as so often was dominating, although he was in a position where if he lost in the final game to Ding Liren, Ding would have leapfrogged him and in fact it would have been the Chinese player who would have taken first place in this elite event.</p>
<p>The problem for Ding was, not only was he playing Magnus, the strongest player in the world, but he had the black pieces. In fact Ding allowed Magnus to very easily take the game along dull paths, with seemingly very little resistance in terms of trying to aim for something more dynamic.</p>
<p>The issue I have with this is that it seems to me that commentators are too ready to let a player off in such circumstances. “Oh never mind Ding, you had a great event, of course it’s always going to be tough playing Black against Magnus.” Of course it’s tough, but surely ultimately sport is all about winning, and if you’re in a tournament then you have to do everything to try and win?</p>
<p>Once again the comparison with other sports seems apt. Imagine a scenario where Barcelona are a goal down from the first leg and playing Real Madrid. They just happily accept the situation that they’re going to get knocked out, and don’t even try and score a goal. Or that Jordan Spieth needs a birdie to force a play-off in the last round of the masters, and just aims to make par. Spectators would be up in arms!</p>
<p>It seems to me that in other sports it’s all about winning - the media hypes up any kind of possible winner, however unlikely it seems. Instead of this Ding is in a chance to win and takes very few risks, allows Magnus to play a very drawish line. In some part I can understand this as I’ve been in similar situations myself and also taken wet draws, and especially in Ding’s case he knows he’s locking up a world number five slot on the live rating. So it’s not easy to completely commit but I believe that’s what he should have done.</p>
<h3>1.2: Zherebukh - Caruana, US Championships 2018</h3>
<p>Anyway, back to the puzzles. I realize that the reader might be familiar with some of these positions, because these are taken from actual games, but not everyone will be. This from a game also played in the US champs.</p>
<p>Black to play. You have a several candidate moves. Assess 1&#8230;Bg4, 1&#8230;Qa5 and 1&#8230;g5. Which move would you play and why?</p><h3>1.3: Onischuk - Shankland, US Championships 2018</h3>
<p>Another game from the same round of the US championships, this time
involving the surprise winner of the tournament, Sam Shankland.</p>
<p>Black to move - what plan would you employ here?</p><h3>1.4: Liang - Lenderman, US Championships 2018</h3>
<p>White has just played the very aggressive Qc6. How would you defend against this move as Black here?</p><p>That’s the end of the puzzles. You don’t have to provide an answer to all of them, but remember the best replies win a free DVD, and if only one person replies that will be you! I will give my answers in two weeks time.</p>]]>Candidates Reviewhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/candidates-reviewhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/candidates-reviewhttps://www.gingergm.com/blog/candidates-reviewThu, 29 Mar 2018 12:03:00 GMT<![CDATA[<h3>Chess finally has the World Title match it deserves</h3>
<p>“Be prepared” might be the scouts motto, but it could just as easily apply to Fabiano Caruana’s performance in the 2018 Candidates, where he outclassed the rest of the field, won comfortably in the end and qualified to take on the reigning World Champion, the Norwegian Magnus Carlsen, in a match that will take place later in the year in London.</p><p>When Lawrence Trent, Caruana’s former manager, told me in Facebook chat just before the tournament began that Caruana had been preparing harder than ever before, it felt significant. And it turned out to be so, because right from round one the tone was set. Caruana simply blew Wesley So away playing typically “Caruana chess”; very sound strategically, but with more than a hint of aggression (19.Ng5!).</p><p>Caruana executed the final blows in that game with such speed and assurance, that it immediately became clear to me that this was indeed a player who was extremely well prepared. When you’ve been working hard at home, somehow it makes the job required on the board so much easier. Gone was the somewhat fragile and spotty Caruana of the last 2-3 years. No this was surely the 7/7 Sinquefield cup Caruana, a player indeed capable of not just humbling some of the best players in the world, but also putting it up to the mighty Norwegian himself.</p>
<p>The tournament was so interesting that I think it’s a good idea to analyse each players performance individually:</p>
<h4>Fabiano Caruana</h4><p>Caruana will be delighted to qualify as it prove thats his hard work ethic has paid off. Sometimes you can prepare as hard as you like for a tournament but the cards just don’t fall your way; so it’s nice when it actually turns out like you intended to. </p>
<p>The key game for Caruana was the round four game against Kramnik. Once again in that game he displayed his abilities as a grinder; you could point to Kramnik’s collapse later in the ending but the fact is that you have to give the guy a chance to mess up. By showing a high level of resistance and trickiness in that endgame (for example, 58&#8230;Nf3! which was immediately met by a terrible blunder 59.Rd1??) he gave Kramnik that opportunity.</p><p>There’s no doubt that Caruana is an exceptional calculator. There’s no way you’d be able to find all these tricky moves deep into the game if your play wasn’t backed up by an exceptional calculating brain. The game with Kramnik was so key because not only did he hamstring a significant rival, a rampaging Krambo, but at the same time he also got to a healthy +2. Being on a decent score early on gave him the kind of breathing space that some of the other players simply never enjoyed, and he would have immediately been thinking that this was a natural consequence of his serious preparation for the event.</p>
<p>What also impressed me with Caruana was how well he handled losing to Karjakin later on. As a competitor, deep in the mists of battle, it would be very easy to become disillusioned to lose at such a late stage in the tournament. I’m sure this loss made the otherwise mild-mannered Caruana very angry, because he would have felt that he lost control of the tournament, yet at the same time he didn’t panic and delivered in the last two rounds two very accomplished games to seal qualification.</p>
<p><strong>Contentment level: 5/5</strong></p>
<h4>Shakhriyar Mamedyarov</h4><p>Although ultimately Mamedyarov will be disappointed not to qualify, I think when he reflects on this tournament in a few weeks time he will realise that in fact he played exceptionally well, and was probably simply unlucky to run into a player in Caruana who was playing equally as well as he was.</p>
<p>That’s the problem you face sometimes when you are competing at a high level. You can do everything correctly, everything well but there’s just this other guy who’s doing the same thing and just a bit better than you are. I think when you look at Mamedyarov’s games from this event though, you wonder if he tried to play too correctly. </p>
<p>There’s a sense that Mamedyarov sacrificed his great strength, unpredictable attacking brilliance, for playing the kind of grinding, accurate chess that comes easily to Carlsen and Caruana. You wonder if someone has taken him aside and said “Look Shak, this kind of hacking stuff is good for opens, but if you want to be World Champion you have to be able to bore it out with the best of them.”</p>
<p>I think it’s a shame, because what it says is that you can’t play like this anymore. You can’t play like Tal, because the human calculating machines that operate in the highest echelons of world chess will pick you off with their computer-like play. We saw Shak essaying and defending the Catalan on both the White side and Black side, and a lot of his games ended up in dry and boring positions where it was difficult to win. Normally that wouldn’t have been a problem, because +2 in most Candidate events might have been good enough to qualify, but it wasn’t good enough in this one.</p>
<p>In future Candidate tournaments I’d like to see a return to the old Shak that the chess world has come to know and love. In some ways this urge to turn yourself into a more efficient, more accurate player, but at the same time sacrificing some of your brilliance. It reminds me of a conversation I once had with former Snooker pro Steve Rush.</p>
<p>He was talking about snooker players like Marco Fu and how being coached by Terry Griffiths had turned them into boring players, when before they’d been out and out attacking players. It seems to me that being a chess player is more than just results; somehow you have an obligation to entertain the public. That can easily be lost in the overriding desire to achieve the best possible score.</p>
<p><strong>Contentment level: 4/5</strong></p>
<h4>Sergey Karjakin</h4><p>At the point in the tournament where Karjakin defeated Caruana, I thought of myself as some sort of soothsayer, as <a href="https://www.gingergm.com/blog/candidates-2018-preview">I suggested in my preview</a> that it was unwise to underestimate the Russian former title challenger, as he was uniquely suited to this type of event. </p>
<p>Alas for Sergey fans, that was as good as it got; although he had battled back well from -2 he had very little left and was only able to get third place.</p>
<p>There seemed to be a lot of people picking up on this theme of being horrified by a prospect of a Carlsen vs Karjakin return match, based on the logic that the first one had been incredibly boring (which it was), though I wasn’t so bothered by such a prospect; mainly I think because Carlsen would have been hugely motivated to squash him in the return. And that in turn might have lead to more exciting games. Now it won’t happen, so any speculation is irrelevant anyway. </p>
<p>The key turning point in Karjakin’s tournament was the win in round seven against Wesley So. This “stopped the rot”, so to speak, and seemed later in the tournament that it might have been the most significant win of all. That game showcased Karjakin’s ability to just keep going, a skill which as we have seen which is so significant in top-level chess right now. He also showed the same skills against Aronian in round 11, although by that stage the Armenian player was completely devoid of confidence as he showed very little resistance in the endgame. </p>
<p>Some might suggest that Karjakin didn’t play well enough over the course of the tournament and was flattered to finish so close. They might well have a point, but the truth is I think Karjakin is an underestimated player in general. He has a very good all-round game and calculates simply and quickly. </p>
<p><strong>Contentment level 3/5</strong></p>
<h4>Ding Liren</h4><p>I think that with the exception of Caruana, Ding is the player who will go away from this tournament most contented. Quite simply with this performance, Ding put down a serious marker for the 2020 Candidates. Going into Berlin he would have been one of the least experienced players; perhaps not so much in terms of playing at this level, but more in terms of dealing with the exceptional tension that such an event, with so much on the line, gives rise to.</p>
<p>I recall saying to Maurice Ashley at the London Classic a few months ago that I felt Ding had a chance, and he looked at me like I was crazy. I don’t think anyone will be underestimating Ding now and I have to admit that it was IM Richard Pert who first tipped me off about Ding and his great potential. He even suggested some years ago when Ding was a little known player, that he would rise to the very top.</p>
<p>Richard has spent time in China and according to him, when he was there it became clear that Ding is something of a national hero and is always getting mentioned on the television. I can only see him kicking on from here and continuing to improve. In my view, assuming he gets there, he will be one of the outstanding favourites for the 2020 Candidates.</p>
<p>Ding was the only unbeaten player and his sharp tactical eye came to the fore on many occasions during the tournament (for example 27…h3! Against Karjakin in the last round, the strength of which was missed by both the commentators and his opponent) and his only disappointing miss would have been against Grischuk in round 11, where he built up a completely winning position only to miss a crushing blow with 29.Nd8!, which would have ended the game at once.</p><p><strong>Contentment level: 5/5</strong></p>
<h4>Alexander Grischuk</h4><p>Grischuk built up a bit of a cult following during the event, which was mostly down to a “Thugstyle” tribute video someone had compiled on YouTube, of some of his more humorous outbursts. If you have a spare ten minutes, check it out below.</p><p>Grischuk seems to me to be one of the more normal of the top players, but he never really got going in this event. Although he did bounce back from the early loss to Kramnik, it seemed that he was stuck around fifty percent and +1 for too long, was lucky to escape against Ding and any lingering hopes he had were firmly extinguished by Mamedyarov in the penultimate round. </p>
<p>The problem in my view that Grischuk has is that he lacks a “big weapon.” You could point to Caruana’s accuracy, Kramnik’s huge self-confidence, Aronian’s creativity and Karjakin’s ability to keep going, and while it seems to me that Gris does everything pretty well, there’s nothing that he’s truly exceptional at. Perhaps I’m being harsh here, and you could certainly suggest that he’s far more exceptional at all aspects of chess than I am, but that’s just the impression that I get.</p>
<p>I wonder if Grishchuk is at a crossroads in his career. The problem is that he’s good enough to be a contender, but is he good enough to be the absolute champion? And if he does have a great strength then it’s surely his nerves, and they will only get worse as he grows older. I wonder if he’ll somehow fall away from the top level like other Russian players Peter Svidler, who seems better known as a commentator these days, and Alexander Morozevich. I hope not because I think his presence adds greatly to these events. I just wonder if he’s one of the more vulnerable players in terms of not being certain to qualify for the 2020 candidates. Have we just witnessed Sasha’s last shot?</p>
<p><strong>Contentment level: 3/5</strong></p>
<h4>Vladimir Kramnik</h4><p>Certainly one of the more interesting performances of the event, if not of all-time! The Kramnik hype went into overdrive after round three, when he defeated Levon Aronian in stunning fashion. Plenty of people after that brilliant win were suggesting that this was now over, the tournament was pretty much done with and Big Vlad would surely qualify to play Magnus.</p><p>This was indeed “hype”, as the next game showed when he was ruthlessly dismissed by Caruana. Some commentators made the point that the win against Aronian made Kramnik over-confident, which meant that he lost his objectivity and pushed for a win in positions where it was not wise to do so, and so on. </p>
<p>I’m not so sure. My own personal view is the reason why Kramnik didn’t just kick on and win the tournament after the Aronian game, is because the strength in depth in world chess is significantly higher than when he won the world championship in 2000. Ok I know Vlad didn’t qualify to play Kasparov via a Candidates tournament (in fact he didn’t qualify at all, losing a match to Shirov beforehand and was only given the exemption because Kasparov preferred to play against Kramnik), but I think if he had done so, and defeated someone as strong as Aronian in 2000, then we would have seen a different scenario developing.</p>
<p>Back then, you have had a breather for two or three rounds. You can catch your breath, and think “well I’ve got one or two low 2700 guys, or maybe high 2600 guys, before I get the next toughie.” Unfortunately for Vlad, that is no longer the case. He beats Aronian, and the very next game he faces someone just as strong, and equally as motivated, in Caruana.</p>
<p>If we look at the situation objectively, then it’s going to be very hard for Kramnik to ever qualify for a World Championship match again. He’s competing with players 15 years or more younger than him. You could point to Korchnoi, who qualified for world championship matches in his late forties and early fifties, but again that was a different era. Korchnoi didn’t have to compete on level terms with 2800 players who are in their mid-twenties. And that’s the task facing Vlad.</p>
<p>Looking on the positive side, Vlad went for it in almost all his games, although I wonder if this strategy was at least partly motivated by a sort of desperation, an inner acknowledgement that perhaps he had to roll the dice early, to build up a buffer so that when he reached the final few rounds, he would have enough of a lead so that the greater energy that the younger players would presumably enjoy at that point wouldn’t have helped them. Except that strategy backfired as he lost far more games than he would do usually.</p>
<p><strong>Contentment rating: 2/5</strong></p>
<h4>Wesley So</h4><p>Although I’m sure Wesley will be bitterly disappointed by his performance, he’s still very young. He’s a little bit like Ding in that he lacks experience in playing in Candidates tournaments.</p>
<p>There’s not a lot else to say about Wesley’s performance. As he’s so young, he could well have another five of these events to play in. </p>
<p>The one game he lost where he really should have got a result was the game against Karjakin. I think that showed that even these super-talented young players can have huge weaknesses because he lost a position that should have really ended in a draw; his knight was slightly misplaced, but at this level you should not be losing such a game. It was a big gift. </p>
<p>In some ways this demonstrated to me why Karjakin’s display in the last world championship match was so impressive. He was able to save many positions that even other super grandmasters would have crumbled in.</p>
<p><strong>Contentment rating: 1/5</strong></p>
<h4>Levon Aronian</h4><p>No question Aronian’s performance here was the surprise of the event and not a good one for his fans. He struggled throughout, losing many games that he would have held comfortably under normal circumstances, which can only lead to the impression that there was something seriously wrong. Whether he was suffering with a cold, or just finding the weight of expectation difficult to handle, isn’t exactly clear.</p>
<p>I do think the game with Kramnik had a really severe effect on his confidence. It’s fine lines at the top level and if he had won that game, we might have seen something completely different, he would have suddenly got confident and we would have seen the flowing, creative chess that is his hallmark. To lose so badly with White, even against such a strong opponent, must have had a humbling effect and it showed in the rest of the tournament.</p>
<p>I also feel that as in the case with Kramnik, qualifying for the world championship final will not get easier with time. He only has a couple of Candidate tournaments before he hits his mid-forties, and can you really see someone making a World Championship breakthrough at that age? For Aronian, it needs to happen soon, so assuming he qualifies for the next edition he needs to make sure he gets everything right. I think the first thing that he needs to do is to make sure he takes the pressure off. Somehow you get the feeling that Aronian should have qualified for a title match by now. It seems like his play over the last 12 years easily deserves it and yet somehow he hasn’t managed to do it. </p>
<p>It’s not just one tournament. Berlin is a particularly bad example but he’s failed at this stage before. He just needs to find a way to make sure it doesn’t happen again, but at the same time avoid putting pressure on himself. How can you prepare seriously for an event and then not take it seriously? it’s a hard thing to do, and we are often faced by these problems when we compete. I just hope for Aronian’s sake that he finds a way because I’m sure he will be personally devastated by the way the tournament turned out.</p>
<p><strong>Contentment rating: 0/5</strong></p><h3>Early thoughts on Caruana vs Carlsen</h3>
<p><a href="https://www.gingergm.com/blog/candidates-2018-preview">As stated in my preview</a>, Caruana was one of the players who I felt would have outstanding chances of defeating Carlsen in a match. Despite the Norwegian more than holding his form at rapid and blitz chess over the last few years, his performances at classical chess have been inconsistent to say the least and must fill the Italian-American player with a great deal of confidence.</p>
<p>He would have looked at the way Karjakin handled Carlsen and thought: “If someone clearly weaker than me can give Magnus so many problems, why can’t I?”</p>
<p>Colm Daly, an experienced international player for Ireland, seems to think Caruana’s victory in the upcoming match with Carlsen to be almost inevitable, suggesting that it’s about an 80 percent chance. While this seems wildly optimistic, it’s hardly sensible to think that Caruana is not going to give Carlsen some serious problems. Caruana doesn’t take as many risks as Carlsen, and he’s not as brilliant, yet he’ll just keep playing his consistent and hard to beat chess and if Carlsen is unable to shake himself out his slumber, that could well be enough. </p>
<p>I think the match is still on Carlsen’s racket. A lot depends on him, his mood and how motivated he is to take down Caruana. If he truly doesn’t care, he’ll surely lose. And he should care, because the last thing he wants is to play in the 2020 Candidates, and have to go through all that again just to win his title back. </p>
<p>That I believe, would be a complete disaster for Carlsen. He’s too strong to fade away.</p>
<p><strong>Verdict: Win for Carlsen</strong></p>]]>